: Confucianism is often valued as a doctrine that highlights both the individual and social dimensions of the ideal person, for it indeed puts special emphasis on such lofty goals as loving all humanity and cultivating the self. Through a close and critical analysis of the texts of the Analects and the Mencius, however, it is attempted to demonstrate that because Confucius and Mencius always take filial piety, or, more generally, consanguineous affection, as not only the foundation but also the (...) supreme principle of human life, the individual and social dimensions are inevitably subordinated to and substantially negated by the filial precisely within the Confucian framework, with the result that Confucianism in essence is neither collectivism nor individualism, but "consanguinitism.". (shrink)

In his dialogue with Zai Wo about the three-year mourning, Confucius establishes a principle of 'justification by feeling at ease,' and insists that one should transcend natural desires by moral emotions. More significantly, he further regards kinship love as the ultimate root and supreme principle of human life. Thus, this dialogue contains almost all the basic elements of the Confucian spirit of consanguineous affection.

Confucius, Mencius, and Xunzi regard the human as an emotional being and especially consider such moral feelings as humane love, filial piety and devoted loyalty to be the constituent elements of humanity. On the one hand, they try to integrate the corresponding multiple roles of the humane person, filial son and loyal subject in harmony in order to make one become a true human in the ethical sense; on the other hand, they assign a supreme position merely to filial piety (...) or loyalty in cases of conflict because they regard one's parents or ruler as the greatest root of one's life, respectively. As a result, their ideas about humanity fall into some in-depth moral paradoxes, which might be resolved by a post-Confucian transformation of the traditional Confucian framework from particularistic consanguinism to universalistic humanism. (shrink)

Mencius regards the 'heart of commiseration' as the 'beginning of humaneness', so as to set up a universal and sufficient foundation for the Confucian ideal of humane love in the human 'heart-nature'. Through a close and critical analysis of the very text of the Mencius, however, this essay tries to show that if in the light of the fundamental spirit of Confucianism, especially in the light of the principles of 'one root' and 'love with distinctions' advocated by Mencius himself in (...) his criticisms on Moist school, this doctrine is not tenable exactly within the Confucian framework, with the result that the ideal of humane love is always rootless in Confucian theory. (shrink)

In his doctrine of 'extending affection' (tui en), Mencius holds that one can transform particular consanguineous affection into universal humane love by the way of 'taking this heart here and applying it to what is over there'. Through a critical analysis of the text of the Mencius, it is attempted to argue that although this doctrine can combine the two mainstays of Confucian thought, i.e., filiality and humaneness, into an integrated unity, it is not tenable within the Confucian framework in (...) the light of the fundamental spirit of Confucianism, especially in the light of the principle of 'love with distinctions' advocated by Mencius himself, which definitely gives consanguineous affection the supreme position in human life. (shrink)

The two love commands attributed to Jesus clearly show the basic feature of Christianity as a "religion of love." However, it may be argued that there is conflict between these commands, so that the Christian idea of love confronts a deep paradox: on the one hand, it takes loving God as the ultimate foundation of loving one's neighbor and loving one's neighbor as the perfect manifestation of loving God. On the other hand, it gives supremacy to loving God over loving (...) one's neighbor, with the result that, in cases of conflict, Christianity has to sacrifice loving one's neighbor to loving God and thus to negate the second great command by the first. (shrink)

On the one hand, Confucianism and Christianity advocate universal love for all humans on the ultimate basis of particular love for parents or for God respectively. On the other hand, they have to sacrifice the former for the latter in cases of conflict since they give top priority merely to the latter. In order to overcome this paradox in theory and realize the ideal of universal love in practice, they should transform their particularistic frameworks into universalistic ones and assign a (...) supreme position to their ideas of universal love for all humans, which imply in a potential way a modern, humanistic principle ‘respect the deserved rights of every human being’. (shrink)

Socrates regards rational knowledge as the decisive factor of human life and even ascribes all virtues and moral actions to it, thereby stressing the ‘rationales’ of ethics. In contrast, Confucius regards kinship love as the decisive factor of human life and even grounds all virtues and moral actions on it, thereby stressing the ‘emotionales’ of ethics. Therefore, we should not lump them together by conceiving Confucius’ ethics also as based on ‘moral reason’.

Through a comparative analysis of the stories of Abraham and Guo, this article tries to argue that some particularistic claims of Christianity and Confucianism, which regard faith in God or filial piety to parents respectively as the sole ultimate principle of human life, may constitute the spiritual mainstay of such serious evils as murdering the innocent in certain in-depth paradoxes. Only by assigning a supreme position to their universal ideas of loving all humans through their self-transformations could the two ethico-religious (...) traditions prevent those morally unacceptable evils motivated by their particularistic claims and overcome their in-depth paradoxes. (shrink)

The Declaration of the Parliament of the World’s Religions tries to establish a global ethic by jointly affirming some irrevocable and unconditional ethical directives on the grounds of their special ultimate realities. Through some case analysis of Christianity and Confucianism, this essay argues that, because these religions often assign a supreme position to these ultimate realities alone and make them trump anything else in a particularistic way, they have to subordinate those ethical directives to these realities. As a result, those (...) ethical directives themselves are no longer irrevocable and unconditional, for they are conditioned bythese ultimate realities and thus are revocable in the cases of conflict with the latter. In other words, the particularistic claims of these religions may permit their adherents to perform such immoral deeds as murder, theft, or lying for the sake of their ultimate realities in real life. Therefore, if the world’s religions genuinely hope to establish a global ethic on the basis of their own religious grounds, they must trust in their ultimate realities in a universalistic way instead of in a particularistic way—that is, they may not place these ultimate realities above a minimum humanist principle ‘every human being must be treated humanely’ absolutely, but should assign a supreme position to the latter and intrinsically integrate it with their trust in their special ultimate realities through a critical and creative self-transformation. (shrink)

本书立足于儒家大师的经典文本, 通过学术性的分析论证, 集中探讨了孔孟荀、董仲舒、宋明儒学以及当代儒学的核心观念, 运用学术批判方法指出了儒家伦理陷入的深度悖论. 本书在批判儒家伦理、正当与善的关系、平等等问题上的一些见解和论证, 为作者在国内外学术界首次明确提出, 具有鲜明的原创性.